Six years ago, I wrote in the American Thinker on the Baltimore Judicial Railroad, where a radical local prosecutor, State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby, was hoping to use the destruction of six officers to further her career. The War on Cops was just catching its stride under the Obama Regime and Eric Holder in his Just-Us Department.
When the first officer’s trial ended in a mistrial, the “right” people were unhappy:
The usual suspects are outraged Officer William Porter was not convicted of a felony in the transport and eventual death of Freddie Gray. From the Baltimore Sun editorial of December 17, “…after jurors failed to come to an unanimous decision on any of the four charges on Mr. Porter no doubt will serve as a disappointment to those wished for the verdict in this case to send a clear and unambiguous message.”
“Clear and unambiguous message?” What does that mean? The state lost at trial because it had no case. At best the officers were guilty of policy violations, which are not crimes. My response to the Baltimore Sun:
In contrast, the statue of Lady Justice shows her with a blindfold and balance. She’s not there to “send a message” but to determine if the accused is guilty of a criminal act. And one of the basic tenets of Western jurisprudence is the burden of proof falls upon the prosecution…
Well, certain things never change. For those outside of the Republic of Texas, our capital, Austin, in a stamp sized spot of liberalism surrounded by a sea of conservatism. To no one’s surprise, the voters of Austin elected a district attorney who ran on screwing cops, err “police accountability.” And we see the War on Cops is not restricted to the North East:
19 Austin police officers charged for handling of 2020 George Floyd protests, union president says
A state grand jury has indicted 19 Austin police officers related to allegations of excessive force during the May 2020 George Floyd protests, according to the Austin police union’s president, citing attorneys who were briefed on the matter.
Grand jurors were considering charges this week against as many as 21 officers — a number that has grown during the ongoing grand jury probe. And the number of indictments already is likely to be among the highest for police of any U.S. city in the social unrest ignited by Floyd’s murder more than 20 months ago…
…Travis County District Attorney José Garza said in a news conference Thursday that the public should expect that “multiple indictments will be forthcoming in the days ahead.”
“A thorough investigation was conducted before our office’s presentation to a grand jury,” Garza said. “The facts discovered in that presentation are disturbing. We believe many protesters were innocent bystanders.”He added the victims suffered “permanent and lasting injuries.”
Remember, one can indict a ham sandwich any day of the week. But back to this case, there are three injured protestors per the article, two of which have already settled their civil suits, and one has not filed a law suit as of yet. The DA is saying that 19 officers used “deadly force” against three rioters, err protestors, in 2020.
Now the details of the charges have not been released as of yet, but it likely they have been charged with Aggravated Assault. Per the Texas Penal Code:
Sec. 22.01. ASSAULT. (a) A person commits an offense if the person:
(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another, including the person’s spouse;
(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person’s spouse; or
(3) intentionally or knowingly causes physical contact with another when the person knows or should reasonably believe that the other will regard the contact as offensive or provocative…
Sec. 22.02. AGGRAVATED ASSAULT. (a) A person commits an offense if the person commits assault as defined in Sec. 22.01 and the person:
(1) causes serious bodily injury to another,including the person’s spouse; or
(2) uses or exhibits a deadly weapon during the commission of the assault…
Three rioters were injured and claim it was not justified. Not surprising, this can lead to a lot of money. However, the question is was the police use force “objectionably reasonable” at the time? The answer is unquestionable, yes. From the Austin Police Department General Orders, dated February 6, 2020.
Austin Police General Orders 2/6/2020
206.5 KINETIC ENERGY PROJECTILES
This department is committed to reducing the potential for violent confrontations when such subjects are encountered. Kinetic energy projectiles are less likely to result in death or serious physical injury.
Kinetic energy projectiles are approved by the Department and are fired from 12 gauge shotguns that are clearly identified as less lethal shotguns. Certain munitions can be used in an attempt to de-escalate a potentially deadly situation, with a reduced potential for death or serious physical injury.
206.5.1 DEPLOYMENT
Approved munitions are justified and may be used in an effort to compel individuals to cease their actions when such munitions present a reasonable option for resolving the situation at hand.
(a) Officers are not required or compelled to use approved munitions in lieu of other reasonable tactics if the involved officers determine that deployment of these munitions cannot be deployed safely.
(b) The safety of hostages, innocent subjects and officers takes priority over the safety of subjects engaged in perceived criminal or suicidal behavior.
206.5.2 EXAMPLES OF CIRCUMSTANCES APPROPRIATE FOR DEPLOYMENT
Examples include, but are not limited to, the following types of situations where the subject:
(a) Is armed with a weapon and the tactical circumstances allow for the safe application of approved munitions.
(b) Has made credible threats to harm himself or others.
(c) Is engaged in riotous behavior or is throwing rocks, bottles or other dangerous projectiles at people and/or officers, creating a risk for injury.
(d) There is reasonable suspicion to believe that the subject has already committed a crime of violence and is refusing to comply with lawful orders…
So officers of the Austin Police Department, in the middle of a riot, use a department authorized intermediate weapon to bring a situation under control, and the DA brings charges against them for…what? If the people hit by the projectiles were not rioting, they were in an area where rioting was going on. I suggest if you do not want to be arrested, or possibly injured, do not be around rioters.
I do not question an intermediate weapon can be used for “deadly force,” or inflict serious bodily injury. A baton is the basic intermediate weapon, but using it against the head will cause major injury. The Houston Police Department had an incident where a man was shot with a TASER, but blinded when a dart struck one eye. But to charge murder, or aggravated assault, requires intent to inflict injury. The intent is not present here.
The Austin city council, in their libtared mad rush to destroy the police department in the aftermath of the George Floyd riots, pretty much achieved their goal. They gutted the department budget, and are so shorthanded they are stripping specialized branches of manpower to back up patrol. As a result, Austin has its highest murder rate in four decades. Moreover, efforts to recall retired officers have failed, to put it politely. One retired officer penned a letter explaining he didn’t leave for money, but for the toxic command climate in Austin PD.
The cops did not trust the mayor, chief, or other politicians before this abortion of law. As these nineteen officers are put through the abuse of the judicial system, every cop in the area will know, “Don’t stick your neck out…you see what happened to them.” Not exactly encouraging effective law enforcement and the politicians will have no one to blame but themselves. Hopefully this slap in the face will wake the voters up finally.
Michael A. Thiac is a retired Army intelligence officer, with over 23 years experience, including serving in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and the Middle East. He is also a retired police patrol sergeant, with over 22 years’ service, and over ten year’s experience in field training of newly assigned officers. He has been published at The American Thinker, PoliceOne.com, and on his personal blog, A Cop’s Watch.
Opinions expressed are his alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of current or former employers.
Follow AFNN
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAz…
Twitter: @AFNNUSA
GETTR: @AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA
Patriot.Online: @AFNN
1 thought on “The Austin Judicial Railroad. Or keeping Austin warped…”